Creation of class 230 DEMUs from ex-LU D78s by Vivarail

[fairysdad]

You cannot make diesel units out of thin air and that includes vivarail and by the time you built some the electfication schemes will have progressed.

Is it not that valley of thinking over the past x years that has caused the lack of any significant new diesel unit fleets in this country?

 

[47802]

Is it not that valley of thinking over the past x years that has caused the lack of any significant new diesel unit fleets in this country?

Well yes Electrification as we all know is proving to be more expensive and happening more slowly than envisaged which not helping the situation along with a acknowledgement now that some DMU/Bi-mode need to be built, but electrification will release DMU's in the next few years and until then the situation will have to be managed as well as possible.

As far as Vivarail goes we still don't have a fully working and tested prototype, even if some were ordered now I bet it would take at least 18 months to 2 years to get them in service.

 

[Mikey C]

Is it not that valley of thinking over the past x years that has caused the lack of any significant new diesel unit fleets in this country?

That and emissions rules which mean that existing DMUs like the 172 are no longer allowed to be offered. Without this, I'm sure small top up 172 orders would have been made

 

[Philip Phlopp]

That and emissions rules which mean that existing DMUs like the 172 are no longer allowed to be offered. Without this, I'm sure small top up 172 orders would have been made

Class 172 is available with a compliant diesel engine, Bombardier just don't want to build them, pricing themselves out of contention for a Class 172 extension with TfL and allegedly not involving themselves with the Northern DMU contract and the prospective bidders.

They may be trying to push the IPEMU option instead, as a way to secure a much larger order and move customers to what is a more profitable product for Bombardier.

Ian Walmsley thinks, on a Class 172, a couple of seats will be lost to accommodate the necessary movement of some underfloor components to allow the newer engine model to be fitted, but otherwise, no real issues.

 

[47802]

Class 172 is available with a compliant diesel engine, Bombardier just don't want to build them, pricing themselves out of contention for a Class 172 extension with TfL and allegedly not involving themselves with the Northern DMU contract and the prospective bidders.

They may be trying to push the IPEMU option instead, as a way to secure a much larger order and move customers to what is a more profitable product for Bombardier.

Ian Walmsley thinks, on a Class 172, a couple of seats will be lost to accommodate the necessary movement of some underfloor components to allow the newer engine model to be fitted, but otherwise, no real issues.

I think we should leave Bombardier out of this discussion, whether they bid for the Northern contract or not is up to them they may feel that after producing the 172 which they didn't get that many orders for it isnt worth their while, particularly if they wanted to produce a design that was valid for a number of years it might need to be based on their Adventra train rather than updating a 172.

What we can say is that compliant engines are available and their will most likely be some manufacturers interested in bidding for the contract.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

As far as Vivarail goes we still don't have a fully working and tested prototype, even if some were ordered now I bet it would take at least 18 months to 2 years to get them in service.

Well said, indeed.

 

[TH172341]

Class 172 is available with a compliant diesel engine, Bombardier just don't want to build them, pricing themselves out of contention for a Class 172 extension with TfL and allegedly not involving themselves with the Northern DMU contract and the prospective bidders.

Sorry to go slightly off the main topic, but do LM still have the option for another 26 Class 172 carriages? I can see why Bombardier are potentially reluctant - hassle of amending the underfloor components in particular if it loses seats.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Despite the interesting postings very recently that have been made about the Class 172 units, it is not just the odd posting about them that has been made but a series of them. Is there not a more suitable thread for those to be on?

Can we now return to the matter of the Class 230 units, please.

 

[northwichcat]

Can we now return to the matter of the Class 230 units, please.

I think the reality with the 230s is there's nothing new to discuss and until Vivarail produce a working unit with multiple carriages which is to be used on actual passenger services this thread is just going to get posts from people arguing whether 230s are viable, whether a new DMU order is viable and where 230s can or can't be used.

 

[D365]

Despite the interesting postings very recently that have been made about the Class 172 units, it is not just the odd posting about them that has been made but a series of them. Is there not a more suitable thread for those to be on?

Sadly not, but as has been explained, they are a bit of a non-issue at this moment.

Can we now return to the matter of the Class 230 units, please.

Oh I'm sure you can take care of that

 

[MML]

With most if not all rolling stock owned by either the manufacturer or the ROSCOs, what is the plan with the Class 230. I'm just wondering how the leasing or financing is planned to work ?

1. Vivarail own and lease to TOC.
2. Vivarail convince TOC to buy.
3. Vivarail convince TOC and ROSCOs buy on behalf of TOC.
or any other alternative.
Just wondering when will the model become clear ?

I suspect whatever deal is offered or arranged, it has to provide an economic return on investment for the owner as well as being operationally profitable for the TOC.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think the reality with the 230s is there's nothing new to discuss and until Vivarail produce a working unit with multiple carriages which is to be used on actual passenger services this thread is just going to get posts from people arguing whether 230s are viable, whether a new DMU order is viable and where 230s can or can't be used.

But this is the very raison d'etre shown as the title of the thread. For those who have followed this thread since inception, there were a number of forum members who in those very early days constantly sang the praises of the Vivarail Class 230 project and of its "innovation" and as the months have gone by, considering just how far Vivarail have actually moved onwards, all that euphemism is now seen for the reality that so exists, noting that today sees the year 2016.

If there is a demand for a thread where all aspects of the Class 172 units can be discussed, then let a new thread be set up to cover those specific matters.

 

[47802]

But this is the very raison d'etre shown as the title of the thread. For those who have followed this thread since inception, there were a number of forum members who in those very early days constantly sang the praises of the Vivarail Class 230 project and of its "innovation" and as the months have gone by, considering just how far Vivarail have actually moved onwards, all that euphemism is now seen for the reality that so exists, noting that today sees the year 2016.

If there is a demand for a thread where all aspects of the Class 172 units can be discussed, then let a new thread be set up to cover those specific matters.

I don't see any reason for a 172 thread, Bombardier are a business if it makes business sense for them to bid for the Northern DMU contract then they will bid if it doesn't they won't, very little else to be said really apart from some armchair experts trying to tell Bombardier and other manufacturers for that matter what they should or shouldn't do.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I don't see any reason for a 172 thread, Bombardier are a business if it makes business sense for them to bid for the Northern DMU contract then they will bid if it doesn't they won't, very little else to be said really apart from some armchair experts trying to tell Bombardier and other manufacturers for that matter what they should or shouldn't do.

You appear not to have followed the point that I was pains to point out in my previous posting.

Just to hi-jack a thread concerned with one specific Vivarail class of units to then continue a discussion on another class of Bombadier (that has absolutely nothing to do with the original thread concerning a Vivarail product contract) with comment regarding a non-related Northern DMU contract, stating you don't see a reason for a Class 172 thread, smacks of sheer laziness.

To then further compound matters by then stating about "armchair experts trying to tell what Bombadier should or shouldn't do" on a thread about a Vivarail project, is indeed taking the phrase "off thread" to the n-th degree...:roll:

 

[47802]

You appear not to have followed the point that I was pains to point out in my previous posting.

Just to hi-jack a thread concerned with one specific Vivarail class of units to then continue a discussion on another class of Bombadier (that has absolutely nothing to do with the original thread concerning a Vivarail product contract) with comment regarding a non-related Northern DMU contract, stating you don't see a reason for a Class 172 thread, smacks of sheer laziness.

To then further compound matters by then stating about "armchair experts trying to tell what Bombadier should or shouldn't do" on a thread about a Vivarail project, is indeed taking the phrase "off thread" to the n-th degree...:roll:

I was simply making the point that I don't think there is a need for a separate thread specifically on 172's and the reasons why, while Vivarail units verses new DMU's in general are not totally unrelated.

To some degree I think the Northern DMU contract is relevant from the point of view that whatever train comes out of that contract may well be considered by bidders for other franchises and the Dft instead of the Vivarail option.

 

[Bletchleyite]

1. Vivarail own and lease to TOC.
2. Vivarail convince TOC to buy.
3. Vivarail convince TOC and ROSCOs buy on behalf of TOC.
or any other alternative.
Just wondering when will the model become clear ?

Spot-hire?

 

[MML]

I notice the Sudbury to Marks Tey route (the Gainsborough line) has an hourly frequency in each direction, 7 days per week. Journey time end to end is scheduled for 19 minutes with either a Class 153 or 156.

Trains between London Liverpool Street and Ipswich / Colchester call at Marks Tey twice per hour.

Would a Class 230 offer enough improvement in acceleration and lower operating costs to permit a half hourly frequency on this line for at least part if not the whole day ?

Improved frequency often results in increased ridership and would improve connection times with the mainline services. I'm sure the Class 153 and 156 could be used elsewhere to increase capacity on the Anglian network.

 

[306024]

What you haven't noticed though is that it is single line throughout. If the class 230 were fitted with engines from Thunderbird 1 then you may have a chance.

Mathematically you would need to reduce the running time to 12 minutes to allow for a 3 minute turnaround at each end. And then how do you provide robust connections in both directions at Marks Tey with just a 3 minute turnaround.

Who will suggest introducing a passing loop at Chappel......

 

[MML]

What you haven't noticed though is that it is single line throughout. If the class 230 were fitted with engines from Thunderbird 1 then you may have a chance.

I was thinking 15 minutes journey time along the single line, immediate turnaround at Sudbury and back again.
Ok maybe I was getting a bit carried away with seeing the acceleration in the video of the single unit in the siding.

I suppose the best frequency that could be achieved would be 40 minute interval, with a 2 minute turnaround each end, but then the clock face interval departure is lost.

 

[306024]

If you could achieve a 15 minute journey time as suggested then yes you could provide a half hourly service. The only snags would be that it would require a driver at each end and there wouldn't be time to open the doors at either end, which would somewhat reduce the passenger loadings

The Wickford - Southminster line runs every 40 minutes, but the connections at Wickford work with the 20 minute frequency on the Liverpool St - Southend service.

Ok maybe I was getting a bit carried away with seeing the acceleration in the video of the single unit in the siding.

If it accelerated like that on the sharp curve leaving Marks Tey there's every chance it would end up on its side, which some may suggest would be the best place for it.

 

[455driver]

I was thinking 15 minutes journey time along the single line, immediate turnaround at Sudbury and back again.
Ok maybe I was getting a bit carried away with seeing the acceleration in the video of the single unit in the siding.

I suppose the best frequency that could be achieved would be 40 minute interval, with a 2 minute turnaround each end, but then the clock face interval departure is lost.

You have never had to shut down a train cab, walk to the other end and set that cab up before departure have you! :roll:

 

[the sniper]

It can take at least 2 minutes just to bugger about with the GSM-R set up...

 

[47802]

It would seem to me that D trains could work local services out of Norwich to such as Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft, fairly short Journey times and self contained area possibly an improvement on the last train I tried to get to Lowestoft on which was a single 153 which was full and standing 20mins before departure.

East Anglia clearly need more units and with Northern probably taking everything that's spare, may well be a choice of D trains or new DMU's.

I also think that GWR may pushed into taking some D trains for their Branches.

The question mark against the D train for me is while I don't doubt they have some good engineers the whole thing looks a bit amateurish, a bit like Scrap Heap Challenge trying to produce a train to compete with the big train manufacturers, which is why they really need to prove it works and works well.

 

[southern442]

It would seem to me that D trains could work local services out of Norwich to such as Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft, fairly short Journey times and self contained area possibly an improvement on the last train I tried to get to Lowestoft on which was a single 153 which was full and standing 20mins before departure.

East Anglia clearly need more units and with Northern probably taking everything that's spare, may well be a choice of D trains or new DMU's.

I also think that GWR may pushed into taking some D trains for their Branches.

I did initially think about the local services on the East Anglia routes, it does seem like a decent idea. I also think that D trains for GWR could be deployed on the local lines in Devon and Cornwall, and they could be painted into a special livery as well. It could also enable the cascade of the 150's to other branch lines (such as the Greenford one) or TOC's, and the scrapping of the pacers and 153's.

 

[northwichcat]

and with Northern probably taking everything that's spare, may well be a choice of D trains or new DMU's.

The Northern bid likely won't have utilised the 185s which are released by the new TPE order or units released by future TPE or MML electrification.

I also imagine the Northern order will be placed with the option of an add-on for more DMUs, which will either allow another operator to receive an add-on order or for Northern to receive more and to release existing units to another operator.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It could also enable the cascade of the 150's to other branch lines (such as the Greenford one) or TOC's, and the scrapping of the pacers and 153's.

The GWR Direct Award indicates that the 143s, 150/1s and 153s in the fleet will all become surplus to requirements as a result of GW and Thames Valley electrification and subsequent cascades. Northern bidders were invited to take on 15xs and 17xs which will become surplus to requirements elsewhere so Arriva may have already secured all the Sprinters which GWR will release, while Arriva will have had to include enough new and cascaded trains in the Northern bid to allow all their 142s and 144s to be withdrawn by 2019.

So only the ATW Pacers will be left and Valley Lines will need some kind on interim solution to meet the post-2019 requirements until Valley Lines gets electrified, so ePacers or D-Trains could work for them.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

So only the ATW Pacers will be left and Valley Lines will need some kind on interim solution to meet the post-2019 requirements until Valley Lines gets electrified, so ePacers or D-Trains could work for them.

Derogate for the Welsh Valleys, it'll probably work out cheaper doing a taxi service for persons of reduced mobility than wasting money on ePacers and other assorted claptrap.

If it's all bundled into one good news story - electrification shovel in ground, new train order and derogation with additional support for PRMs, it shouldn't be drastically unpopular.

 

[northwichcat]

Derogate for the Welsh Valleys, it'll probably work out cheaper doing a taxi service for persons of reduced mobility than wasting money on ePacers and other assorted claptrap.

The post-2019 modifications aren't just for people of reduced mobility. In fact as Pacers carry ramps it's probably more people with other disabilities like reduced/no vision or hearing or learning disabilities that the post-2019 modifications will benefit. This CIS helps people who have very poor short term memory and in the case of non-Welsh people travelling on the Valley Lines I'm sure the scrolling list of calling points will be very useful to dyslexics.

I'm not sure the height of the seating is an issue on the ATW 142s or 150s as the original seating has been replaced but in saying taxis are cheaper you would have to allow for anyone who struggles to get in or out of a low seat being taxied around, which could get very expensive in areas where a lot of pensioners live!

 

[krus_aragon]

You cannot make diesel units out of thin air and that includes vivarail and by the time you built some the electfication schemes will have progressed.

Harry Potter could

He preferred to travel by steam train, though.

 

[47802]

The Northern bid likely won't have utilised the 185s which are released by the new TPE order or units released by future TPE or MML electrification.

I also imagine the Northern order will be placed with the option of an add-on for more DMUs, which will either allow another operator to receive an add-on order or for Northern to receive more and to release existing units to another operator.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


.

Those release dates are some way off even for the first release from new units given the need to uplift capacity first, and clearly EMT are going to need more capacity XC as well, and by the time MML Meridians are available Scotrail may have had enough of those clapped out HST's.

Having spent probably more than they would like on Northern as has already been suggested such as Anglia my be an Austerity target, especially as there are also trains which also need replacing on that franchise eg the Loco Hauled Norwich - London.

There are still plenty of unknowns at present and uses for the D train are certainly still possible.

 

[northwichcat]

Having spent probably more than they would like on Northern as has already been suggested such as Anglia my be an Austerity target, especially as there are also trains which also need replacing on that franchise eg the Loco Hauled Norwich - London.

If DfT have learnt from past mistakes (waits for laughing to cease) then getting additional DMUs while a production line is open will be cheaper than letting it close and then spending years mulling over whether a DMU order should go out to tender for manufacturers to offer new design DMUs in response to and then deciding there's an election coming in so we better do something.